Notice anything? After looking at TOs for the last 5 years, I have concluded that TOs are more a reflection of a team's overall performance rather than a determining factor of a team's performance (good teams have better TOMs, poor teams have worse TOMs).

I am fully aware that MGoBrian and others have stated their e-pinion that turnovers are random. Not buying it.

I challenge anyone to ask/tell Brady Hoke that he is wasting his time talking about turnovers (both to the media and his team). Or ask him why he is wasting so much time in practices with drills that are meant to minimize turnovers.

I challenge anyone who watches Devin Gardner run with the ball to rationally believe that if he fumbles it is just "a random event or just bad luck".

Anyone who is counting on regression to the mean to solve Michigan's turnover problem is going to be very, very disappointed. There are solutions -- but just ignoring the problem and hoping it will all even out, is not one of the solutions.

Since this is the bye week, it is as good as time as any to revisit this question in more detail with some data.

Quarterbacks!: In 2011, quarterbacks were responsible for 19 of 21 turnovers. In 2012, quarterbacks were responsible for 23 of 25 turnovers. So far in 2013, quarterbacks are responsible for 8 of 8 turnovers.

During the game, I also thought the turnovers were more of an impact. In fact, I was shocked when the calculations came out the way they did.

I think the Mathlete did an analysis last year (perhaps the year before?) that indicated the change in momentum due to turnovers was not very significant. But, it seemed like the TOs hurt M a lot more than the EP indicates.

Beginning with the 2009 Football Outsiders Almanac, Brian Fremeau and Bill Connelly, originators of Football Outsiders' two statistical approaches -- FEI and S&P+, respectively -- began to create a combined ranking that would serve as Football Outsiders' 'official' college football rankings.

Yeah, I agree. I think the fake punt ends up as just another play in the official stats. Because the FEI folks actually gave M the advantage in Special Teams (by a whopping 5.2 points!) I assume they do not even include this as a special teams play.

"Half of all teams finished within 10 ranking spots of their preseason FEI projection last year. 26 percent finished within five ranking spots. 20 percent finished within two ranking spots."

"the correlation of FEI projections to FEI final ratings at the end of the year is .785."

BUT, they also say,

"Projecting team efficiency ratings and game outcomes for 124 teams is relatively easy at the macro level. For the most part, the top teams consistently dominate college football and are easy to identify through the projection factors"